National Center for Science Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112656357
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5106017203
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Biological & Life Sciences

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,470,847
Expenses
$1,492,717
Assets
$4,042,193
Liabilities
$135,214

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kenneth Miller Director (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Amanda Townley (Executive Dir.): $184,525 total reported compensation
  • Glenn Branch (Deputy Director): $150,314 total reported compensation
  • Paul Oh (Communications Dir): $124,176 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The National Center for Science Education NCSE is a not-for-profit organization that helps ensure students across the country receive an accurate and effective evolution and climate science education. We do this by supporting teachers with resources and best teaching practices by monitoring and mobilizing against efforts to undermine science education, whether at the statehouse or in the classroom and by engaging in research to understand, maintain, and improve science education. NCSE's supporters are scientists, teachers, and citizens with diverse political affiliations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Communications: NCSE is the go-to source for the public generally, and the news media in particular, for up-to-date information on threats to the integrity of the science classroom and proactive solutions to helping students better understand climate science and evolution. In 2025, we launched a podcast that focused on educating the public to dispel common misconceptions about climate change and evolution. Over two seasons and 17 episodes, the podcast was downloaded 18,000 times. (Continued at Schedule O.)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 60.9%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.71; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40% of revenue deployed · 60.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $910K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.